# Secret Service deleted texts around January 6 as part of a "device-replacement" program **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 15, 2022, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977 "2022-07-15T00:17:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/21 "2022-07-15T14:47:21Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > I’ve seen similar with text messages in armed robbery cases, where law enforcement is trying to prove up a conspiracy. They don’t go to the phone to get the information- they go to AT&T, or Sprint, or Verizon, or whoever. Assuming this went down as described, I believe you still need a judge to issue a warrant to get the messages from the carrier. That would require strong evidence that this data is needed for a criminal investigation. Assuming the DOJ proceeds with an investigation, maybe these texts are recoverable. But I wouldn’t expect anything before that. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/22 "2022-07-15T15:08:53Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > That would require strong evidence that this data is needed for a criminal investigation. I don’t think congressional subpoena would need evidence of a crime. Just a legislative purpose. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/23 "2022-07-15T15:21:54Z")
You’re right - the committee already issued subpoenas to Verizon for records related to the Capitol attack and for Mark Meadows’ records specifically. In both cases, the requests were contested by the targets, and unless I missed an update, it’s still working its way through the courts. Reading Verizon’s responses, it sounds like they generally comply with a subpoena, but only after notifying the targets and giving them the opportunity to contest it. So who knows how that would work in this case. Would the Secret Service contest it? Could the individual people? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/24 "2022-07-15T15:45:48Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > That was my thought as well, but it could have been more benign, like some agents texting that the president had requested transport to the Capitol, followed by a text calling off the movement because of logistical or security concerns. But even texts confirming the observed dangers in the crowd are impactful, as they confirm (yet again) that this was known to be a violent mob before Trump addressed them. I’ve read somewhere here that whenever there is ambiguity in a legal contract, and the two parties contest it, the ambiguity is ruled against that party that drafted the contract. If they wanted some clause to be in effect, it was their job to put it in the contract. Under that same theory, I have no problem assuming the deleted messages to be as damning as possible against the ones who deleted them. If they wanted the messages to exonerate them from any wrongdoing, then they should have kept them. ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/25 "2022-07-15T16:18:24Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > …Would the Secret Service contest it? Could the individual people? Secret Service is part of DHS. While the head of the Secret Service is a holdover from the previous administration the Secretary of DHS is a Biden appointee. It seems likely to me Secretary Mayorkas of DHS would direct the Secret Service to comply with any subpoenas that may come along regarding these text messages. The current Director of the Secret Service, James Murray has announced his retirement as of 7.30.22 so he will be gone soon. Even if Republicans in Congress can delay any needed confirmation of a replacement it still strikes me as likely the DHS Secretary can order compliance with a subpoena. ---
**Author:** ![Temporary\_Name](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8c91f0/32.png) [@Temporary\_Name](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Temporary_Name)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/26 "2022-07-15T16:19:38Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Does the secret service use its own private phone carrier? I do not know for certain, but is it possible that delicate government information might not use cell towers but instead go through military satellites the way military secrets are conveyed? I remember when satellite phones were introduced, but those ran through commercial birds. Surely the Secret Service uses highly encrypted governmental communication birds?? ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/27 "2022-07-15T16:46:18Z")
I would think that any SS agent that works with, or has contact with the President has Top Secret clearance. They better have that background check for it. So getting anything from any cell phone carrier or whatever network that is set up, is gonna be difficult at best. ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/28 "2022-07-15T16:55:22Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I have no problem assuming the deleted messages to be as damning as possible against the ones who deleted them. That one’s known as spoliation, and you have the effect of it correct: > **[How Spoliation of Evidence Impacts Litigation - Jones Kelleher LLP Attorneys...](https://joneskell.com/how-spoliation-of-evidence-impacts-litigation/)** > [@](#): > > Only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation may: > > 1. Presume that the lost information was unfavorable to the party; > 2. Instruct the jury that it may or must presume the information was unfavorable to the party; or > 3. Dismiss the action or enter a default judgment.” ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/29 "2022-07-15T16:57:57Z")
> [@Horatius](#): > > There’s a decent chance that they’re using a commercial service so as to have extensive coverage, but the texts themselves were encrypted by their texting system prior to being sent. The company would have the texts, but they’d be unreadable without the decryption system. Even without decrypting the individual messages, who was where while talking to whom could be useful evidence. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/30 "2022-07-15T16:59:52Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > It seems likely to me Secretary Mayorkas of DHS would direct the Secret Service to comply with any subpoenas that may come along regarding these text messages. But it’s not the SS that needs to comply. If the SS deleted them, then it’s the carrier who needs to comply. If the SS as an agency has standing to contest the request, then you’re right that they probably wouldn’t under the current DHS leadership. If the individuals would have standing to contest, then it would be a different situation. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/31 "2022-07-15T17:06:45Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I’ve read somewhere here that whenever there is ambiguity in a legal contract, and the two parties contest it, the ambiguity is ruled against that party that drafted the contract. If they wanted some clause to be in effect, it was their job to put it in the contract. This seemed somewhat questionable to me, for a variety of reasons, so I checked Google. It seems to be a soft rule, when the drafter is a big company with lots of money and fancy lawyers as the drafters, versus a random joe with limited legal counsel. > **[How Courts Interpret Ambiguous Contracts](https://ccbjournal.com/articles/how-courts-interpret-ambiguous-contracts)** > > A court's objective in a case involving the interpretation of a contract is to ascertain what the parties intended. When a contract's provisions are clear, a court will enforce the contract as written, without any reference to evidence outside the... For most other situations, the rule is not used. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/32 "2022-07-15T17:15:50Z")
> [@DavidNRockies](#): > > That one’s known as spoliation, and you have the effect of it correct: > > [How Spoliation of Evidence Impacts Litigation - Jones Kelleher LLP Attorneys at Law](https://joneskell.com/how-spoliation-of-evidence-impacts-litigation/) > > > [@](#): > > > > Only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation may: But note that the court must make a finding that the loss of records was “intended” to deprive the other side of records. “We accidentally lost it”, or, “It was deleted as part of routine practice” doesn’t get the spoliation instruction you’ve referenced. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/33 "2022-07-15T17:42:38Z")
But why does DHS need a subpoena to get their own data from the cell carrier with whom they have a contract? Why can’t they just request it under their contract with the cell carrier? Secret Service is just a branch of DHS. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/34 "2022-07-15T17:55:08Z")
Generally they wouldn’t. But likely somebody is playing silly buggers and hoping to get away with it or at least delay/annoy proceedings ETA: or just incompetent - I would hope the Secret Service and DHS in general were staffed with the best and brightest but the last several years have given lie to this notion repeatedly ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/35 "2022-07-15T18:00:24Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > I would hope the Secret Service and DHS in general were staffed with the best and brightest but the last several years have given lie to this notion repeatedly Yeah, I used to hold the USSS in very high regard. Between Carol Leonnig’s book and this Ornato guy and other Trumpers, their stock has really plummeted. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/36 "2022-07-15T18:07:27Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > Between Carol Leonnig’s book and this Ornato guy and other Trumpers, their stock has really plummeted “Everything Trump touches dies.” ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/37 "2022-07-15T18:08:53Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > But note that the court must make a finding that the loss of records was “intended” to deprive the other side of records. “We accidentally lost it”, or, “It was deleted as part of routine practice” doesn’t get the spoliation instruction you’ve referenced. If the court believes such claims, at least. If the Secret Service “accidentally” lost the messages just from those two days, that doesn’t look like an accident at all. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2022, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/38 "2022-07-15T18:30:49Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > If the Secret Service “accidentally” lost the messages just from those two days, that doesn’t look like an accident at all. Oh I certainly agree. But this is a legal hurdle (intent to deprive) that must be met. Simply losing the evidence, no matter how convenient it may be, is not enough to trigger an inference that it was prejudicial to those who lost it. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2022, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/39 "2022-07-16T03:57:22Z")
> **[Jan. 6 panel subpoenas Secret Service for erased texts](https://apnews.com/article/capitol-siege-government-and-politics-10d40ce2ddd78f7cd6b57e945aa63f44)** > > WASHINGTON (AP) — The House committee investigating the Capitol riot has subpoenaed the Secret Service for text messages agents reportedly deleted around Jan. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2022, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977/40 "2022-07-16T17:07:26Z")
So what will be the response? “You don’t have the right to see them.” ? “They’re deleted. That means they’re really gone!” ? Long legal battle streaching into who knows when? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/secret-service-deleted-texts-around-january-6-as-part-of-a-device-replacement-program/967977.md?page=3)